Projected taxpayer funded dollars to build the entire thing (a projected bell curve of expenditure).
Projected oil demand, and price for the time that the pipeline remains operational.
Finally, a bell curve of ROI for us.

I know I know, the environmental damage this would do is horrible, blah blah blah. I agree. I just want to know if this is at the very least a good financial decision or not.

Again, I'm looking for actual quantitative projections. Not stuff like, "but Asia is moving toward renewables".

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] GreenBeard@lemmy.ca 18 points 2 weeks ago (5 children)

ROI is basically non-existent. The numbers are closely held trade secrets, you won't find the projections published anywhere, but most sources agree, the prospects for demand are bad, which is why no private investors can be found. Industry insiders agree that basically the whole industry is sun-setting, so the majors are just going to ride it into the ground, claim capital losses and declare bankruptcy after the equity is safely transferred elsewhere. Optimistically we're looking at maybe 40-60 years before we even recoup the initial principle.

What it does do, however, is make it basically impossible for Alberta to separate. It catches their nuts in an economic vise. Their debt to Canada because of those two pipes would bankrupt them 100x over if they ever tried to leave.

[–] yes_this_time@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

Yeah, its an expensive nation building project.

TIL oil pipelines can be repurposed, so maybe they can have some life when demand drops in the coming years?

[–] ValueSubtracted@startrek.website 6 points 2 weeks ago

World's most badass waterslide

load more comments (2 replies)

load more comments (3 replies)